MicrostockGroup
Agency Based Discussion => iStockPhoto.com => Topic started by: roidi on June 21, 2017, 06:43
-
What is the lowest earnings per download? I $ 0.00077 :(
License Fee $ 0.00510 Rate 15% Gross Royalty $ 0.00077 (DeepMeta/Sales)
(http://img26.rajce.idnes.cz/d2602/14/14224/14224126_346bd058990f32a31a9dfe7a690ef040/images/000077.jpg)
-
Some money is better than no money. :-(
-
What is the lowest earnings per download? I $ 0.00077 :(
License Fee $ 0.00510 Rate 15% Gross Royalty $ 0.00077 (DeepMeta/Sales)
Wow! This is scary!
-
I thought the minimum was 2 cents?
-
I thought the minimum was 2 cents?
Nope, much lower amounts on my spreadsheets too.
-
Some money is better than no money. :-(
$ 0.00077 is probably less than half of the cost of a click with your mouse…
-
Some money is better than no money. :-(
$ 0.00077 is probably less than half of the cost of a click with your mouse…
Look at the upside... you just need one sale a week and you'll have $1 in 25 years. Get that up to 300 sales a week and you'll be raking in $1 every month. And you only need 52,000 sales a day to get minimum wage in the US! Result.
-
What is the lowest earnings per download? I $ 0.00077 :(
License Fee $ 0.00510 Rate 15% Gross Royalty $ 0.00077 (DeepMeta/Sales)
Presumably these are the Getty Connect program, where the files aren't actually downloaded. I don't pretend to understand it, but this thread was from the launch:
https://www.microstockgroup.com/istockphoto-com/interesting-times-in-which-to-live (https://www.microstockgroup.com/istockphoto-com/interesting-times-in-which-to-live)
-
On one of my latest sales reports, I received $0.00 for one of my images. What's up with that? Is IStock giving away some of our content for free?
-
On one of my latest sales reports, I received $0.00 for one of my images. What's up with that? Is IStock giving away some of our content for free?
No, it's been explained over on the forums, which have all been rearranged in the past 24 hours, so good luck on finding it there, and on an email we received months back*.
You should find another sale for the same file, which is the real sale.
(Actually, I think it was discussed on msg a while back, *probably late Feb/early March after the first of the new sales reports in which many of us had these $0.00 reports).
-
On one of my latest sales reports, I received $0.00 for one of my images. What's up with that? Is IStock giving away some of our content for free?
No, it's been explained over on the forums, which have all been rearranged in the past 24 hours, so good luck on finding it there, and on an email we received months back*.
You should find another sale for the same file, which is the real sale.
(Actually, I think it was discussed on msg a while back, *probably late Feb/early March after the first of the new sales reports in which many of us had these $0.00 reports).
You are very diligent. To be honest I'm still with Istock just but I really cant bear to go through the sales reports depressing and a waste of time. I'm mercenary so if I get a few $$$ I will carry on.
-
On one of my latest sales reports, I received $0.00 for one of my images. What's up with that? Is IStock giving away some of our content for free?
No, it's been explained over on the forums, which have all been rearranged in the past 24 hours, so good luck on finding it there, and on an email we received months back*.
You should find another sale for the same file, which is the real sale.
(Actually, I think it was discussed on msg a while back, *probably late Feb/early March after the first of the new sales reports in which many of us had these $0.00 reports).
You are very diligent. To be honest I'm still with Istock just but I really cant bear to go through the sales reports depressing and a waste of time. I'm mercenary so if I get a few $$$ I will carry on.
I'm not uploading but I try to keep up with some info, not always succeeding.
The new forum arrangement makes it even FAR more difficult to find info than before. It's obviously deliberate, their mushroom management gets ever more engrained.
-
Some money is better than no money. :-(
What! You are kidding right?! :o
-
Some money is better than no money. :-(
What! You are kidding right?! :o
You're saying that no money is better than some money? You are kidding right?! :o
-
Some money is better than no money. :-(
What! You are kidding right?! :o
You're saying that no money is better than some money? You are kidding right?! :o
You just love to snipe don't you
So you would be happy to get $ 0.00077??
Stop being a dick
-
I would be happy to get some money compared to getting no money, yes... you dick.
-
Ok, there are sales where you get very low amount of $ for sub. sales, but there are also sales, where you get high amount of $ for sub sale. So on average, RPD is similar to that at SS or FT, at least for me.
-
I would be happy to get some money compared to getting no money, yes... you dick.
We are all here to make money.
If we don't like what a company pays us we simply close down our portfolio to them. Bottom line- it is 'our' choice if we want to do business with any company.
-
It's hard to process $0.00077 being described as "some money".
There is probably that much "money" in my lungs right now, in the form of atoms of gold drifting in the atmosphere.
Let's get real. This is zero.
-
stockastic, thank you for a good laugh! So glad I'm not with them anymore.
-
It's hard to process $0.00077 being described as "some money".
There is probably that much "money" in my lungs right now, in the form of atoms of gold drifting in the atmosphere.
Let's get real. This is zero.
This is the most intelligent comment in this thread
-
It's hard to process $0.00077 being described as "some money".
There is probably that much "money" in my lungs right now, in the form of atoms of gold drifting in the atmosphere.
Let's get real. This is zero.
Great post. People in this business having an argument over this makes you wonder though.
-
It would do everyone good to remember that famous admonition posted a few years ago in the IS forum: "Money isn't what's going to make you happy." They're just trying to uphold their standards. Give 'em a break.
-
"Money isn't what's going to make you happy."
But having no money at all is pretty much guaranteed to make you unhappy to a certain extent! Unless you lead a completely self-sustained lifestyle... then it would be ok. Own your own home, grow your own food, solar power etc.
-
"Money isn't what's going to make you happy."
But having no money at all is pretty much guaranteed to make you unhappy to a certain extent! Unless you lead a completely self-sustained lifestyle... then it would be ok. Own your own home, grow your own food, solar power etc.
You probably weren't around when this iconic statement was made by an Stock executive when they FKDUS on royalty cuts. It is a sarcastic post.
-
we're talking about streaming a photo, right? this is a photo displayed somewhere for a short period of time? its like spotify, royalties are low as well because it is just streaming music, there is no physical download. is there any information on the earnings sheet how long an image was streamed?
-
Some money is better than no money. :-(
Not if you're cannabalizing earnings with the same images elsewhere.
-
Some money is better than no money. :-(
What! You are kidding right?! :o
You're saying that no money is better than some money? You are kidding right?! :o
You just love to snipe don't you
So you would be happy to get $ 0.00077??
Stop being a dick
If you do that 100 times, it comes to almost $.08. What is minimum payment at iStock? If you never make payout, this is still no money. I deleted most of my files and they closed my account-I think I left one just as a placeholder in case things ever improved.
-
I agree with you all on Istock, but since january, my RPD is close to 0.6$. On SS is 0.55$. And RPI on Istock is close to 0.3$. Compared to SS which is about 0.2$. I do not know, feelings are mixed up, but numbers do not lie.
-
Nothin' from nothin' leaves nothin'
You gotta have somethin' if you want to be with me
Nothin' from nothin' leaves nothin'
You gotta have somethin' if you want to be with me
I'm not tryin' to be your hero
'Cause that zero is too cold for me, Brrr
I'm not tryin' to be your highness
'Cause that minus is too low to see, yeah
Nothin' from nothin' leaves nothin'
And I'm not stuffin', believe you me
Don't you remember I told ya
I'm a soldier in the war on poverty, yeah
Yes, I am
Nothin' from nothin' leaves nothin'
You gotta have somethin' if you want to be with me
Nothin' from nothin' leaves nothin'
You gotta have somethin' if you want to be with me
You gotta have somethin' if you want to be with me
You gotta bring me somethin' girl, if you want to be with me
- "Nothing from Nothing", Billy Preston
-
On one of my latest sales reports, I received $0.00 for one of my images. What's up with that? Is IStock giving away some of our content for free?
No, it's been explained over on the forums, which have all been rearranged in the past 24 hours, so good luck on finding it there, and on an email we received months back*.
You should find another sale for the same file, which is the real sale.
(Actually, I think it was discussed on msg a while back, *probably late Feb/early March after the first of the new sales reports in which many of us had these $0.00 reports).
No kidding, you're right. The way I see things, every change IS makes is to hide more or take more from us, there's never anything that's better for us when they get done.
-
Some money is better than no money. :-(
Not if you're cannabalizing earnings with the same images elsewhere.
But how do you know that you are cannibalising such images?
-
we're talking about streaming a photo, right? this is a photo displayed somewhere for a short period of time? its like spotify, royalties are low as well because it is just streaming music, there is no physical download. is there any information on the earnings sheet how long an image was streamed?
Hats off to IStock for having the nerve to pull this one.
It really is nothing like streaming music. Stock photos are a business to business thing not a final consumer thing. There are far less paying customers for images than for music. Anyone who has ever shopped for microstock RF images knows typically you are using them for one campaign or similar anyway, so you may as well be "streaming" them i.e. a "streaming" customer is often getting the same use out of it as anyone else, we are just getting paid a fraction of a fraction of a cent while Getty gets to pocket an ongoing subscription fee from the customer. It's a win, win, lose as usual.
-
I agree with you all on Istock, but since january, my RPD is close to 0.6$. On SS is 0.55$. And RPI on Istock is close to 0.3$. Compared to SS which is about 0.2$. I do not know, feelings are mixed up, but numbers do not lie.
But how many DLs and how much does each make in total income? RPD is a false statistic is so many ways. My RPD is averaging $20 at Alamy, with one DL a month. Here's the sad part, that's more than I make now on IS since the change. And my iStock RPD is probably 20 cents. I haven't taken the time to do the math, because there are so many .02 subscription sales and the data they give us is almost impossible to evaluate.
Do you have the identical images on IS and SS for that RPI? I don't. For that reason, SS RPI is lower, many more images, but I'm earning more than ever on SS since the change and IS is down to 2007 income.
If I can ever manage my own images again on IS, I'm removing everything except the unsold leftovers. My hope is that some day, they may wake up and care about contributors and a fair commission rate. 2 cent subscription commission on a 10 cent download. Of course people are insulted and leaving.
Yes the fact that Getty has pulled this off and still has people happy to take nearly nothing and smile about what they get, is a masterful play, taking advantage of willing victims and desperate people. Above all, Getty is winning the race to the bottom by a large margin.
-
I agree with you all on Istock, but since january, my RPD is close to 0.6$. On SS is 0.55$. And RPI on Istock is close to 0.3$. Compared to SS which is about 0.2$. I do not know, feelings are mixed up, but numbers do not lie.
But how many DLs and how much does each make in total income? RPD is a false statistic is so many ways. My RPD is averaging $20 at Alamy, with one DL a month. Here's the sad part, that's more than I make now on IS since the change. And my iStock RPD is probably 20 cents. I haven't taken the time to do the math, because there are so many .02 subscription sales and the data they give us is almost impossible to evaluate.
Do you have the identical images on IS and SS for that RPI? I don't. For that reason, SS RPI is lower, many more images, but I'm earning more than ever on SS since the change and IS is down to 2007 income.
If I can ever manage my own images again on IS, I'm removing everything except the unsold leftovers. My hope is that some day, they may wake up and care about contributors and a fair commission rate. 2 cent subscription commission on a 10 cent download. Of course people are insulted and leaving.
Yes the fact that Getty has pulled this off and still has people happy to take nearly nothing and smile about what they get, is a masterful play, taking advantage of willing victims and desperate people. Above all, Getty is winning the race to the bottom by a large margin.
I agree with you that RPD is wrong in case of alamy, but in my case (Istock vs SS) here is the numbers:
Istock: about $400 - 670 DLs (RPD 0.6)
SS: about $190 - 470 DLs (RPD 0.4)
This is for month May. And for other months since January are pretty much the same math. I have same images on both sites, 50 illustrations less on istock compared to SS.
Because of that, I dont know what to think about Istock... In my case works fine, but...
-
Some money is better than no money. :-(
Not if you're cannabalizing earnings with the same images elsewhere.
But how do you know that you are cannibalising such images?
You can't really know for sure because we don't have access to that data. Personally, though, I choose not to offer my images at that compensation point.
-
That it is not the main problem.
Return from photos are extremely low.
You have to factor how much time you waste uploading: as an example SS takes me less than an hour per month to upload about 200 photos. I get about $100 with them, it is only just worth doing, and only it because it does go up every month.
Bloody istock is so complex that it takes me 5-6 hours per month to upload there, so if it doesn't give me at least $400, forget it
-
Face it, at 2 cents a download you are losing money, not to mention these fractions of a cent "streaming" payouts.
Consider the time it took to take the photo, process it, upload it, keyword it. How many of those 2 cent or less downloads would it take to even pay you a minimum wage?
If you are happy to just get "something" instead of nothing, your economic reasoning is faulty. You're not getting something -- it's costing you money. Get a job at McDonalds instead. You'll be ecstatic.
-
I believe it is called "opportunity cost" in economics... It is actually costing you money to upload there.
-
[wrong thread]
-
Face it, at 2 cents a download you are losing money, not to mention these fractions of a cent "streaming" payouts.
Consider the time it took to take the photo, process it, upload it, keyword it. How many of those 2 cent or less downloads would it take to even pay you a minimum wage?
If you are happy to just get "something" instead of nothing, your economic reasoning is faulty. You're not getting something -- it's costing you money. Get a job at McDonalds instead. You'll be ecstatic.
I have some pix that have no downloads.
And I have some pix that have earned me thousands over the past decade. A handful of them have returned more money than the vast majority of my uploads. And some of them I never thought would do so well.
I can't predict in advance which images will sell like hot cakes. So I accept that postprocessing, keywording and uploading the poor earners is part of the package.
I can't do anything about the time and effort it took me to upload the poor earners.
As for my economic reasoning ... try looking up the sunk cost fallacy on Google. Your reasoning is a variation of that.
-
I believe it is called "opportunity cost" in economics... It is actually costing you money to upload there.
If you could predict that an individual image would only earn you 0.0000000001 cents over your lifetime, you wouldn't bother uploading it.
Unfortunately you don't know in advance which pix will sell and which won't.
So if you stop uploading because there's a chance you might lose money on any individual image, you will refrain from uploading other images that may make good money unexpectedly.
-
I believe it is called "opportunity cost" in economics... It is actually costing you money to upload there.
If you could predict that an individual image would only earn you 0.0000000001 cents over your lifetime, you wouldn't bother uploading it.
Unfortunately you don't know in advance which pix will sell and which won't.
So if you stop uploading because there's a chance you might lose money on any individual image, you will refrain from uploading other images that may make good money unexpectedly.
yes need to look at total time in vs total income out and decide if its worth it for you. If you can use that time more effectively elsewhere then go for it ;-)
-
I believe it is called "opportunity cost" in economics... It is actually costing you money to upload there.
If you could predict that an individual image would only earn you 0.0000000001 cents over your lifetime, you wouldn't bother uploading it.
Unfortunately you don't know in advance which pix will sell and which won't.
So if you stop uploading because there's a chance you might lose money on any individual image, you will refrain from uploading other images that may make good money unexpectedly.
That's why we need to make a reasonable amount of money from the images that do sell. A thousand of those $0.00077 will make only $0.77. If your best selling images are making less than $1, there's really no point in doing this. It's fine to think that those $0.00077 are rare now but if people just accept this and the other sites start using the same model, we could all be seeing a lot of those earnings in the future. When microstock started, a lot of people selling for much higher prices were angry with us accepting such low prices but it was still possible to make good money with high volume of sales. Now we have the threat of a model that only works with millions of downloads and only the sites will make money from that.
-
When microstock started, a lot of people selling for much higher prices were angry with us accepting such low prices but it was still possible to make good money with high volume of sales. Now we have the threat of a model that only works with millions of downloads and only the sites will make money from that.
When I started on iStock, images sold for one dollar, and I got ten cents of that.
-
Some money is better than no money. :-(
Not if you're cannabalizing earnings with the same images elsewhere.
The trouble is, if you remove your image to prevent cannibalisation, there is very little chance that your picture elsewhere will pick up the sale you lost on iS. That sale will go to somebody else - probably on iS, but maybe elsewhere.
Even in the unusual case of your image being truly unique, the odds are probably still against it being found amidst a gazillion files on some other site, amid scores of different sites. And how many pictures are so unique as to not easily be substituted by something else?
-
I believe it is called "opportunity cost" in economics... It is actually costing you money to upload there.
If you could predict that an individual image would only earn you 0.0000000001 cents over your lifetime, you wouldn't bother uploading it.
Unfortunately you don't know in advance which pix will sell and which won't.
So if you stop uploading because there's a chance you might lose money on any individual image, you will refrain from uploading other images that may make good money unexpectedly.
yes need to look at total time in vs total income out and decide if its worth it for you. If you can use that time more effectively elsewhere then go for it ;-)
Yup - but, you need to take account of how earnings have changed over time. My earnings per file look OK overall, but the picture is skewed by far, far better days in the past. If I look at EPF for last month it's about 1c per file, so I would need to add 50,000 files to make $500-1,000 a month. That would mean working full time, flat-out for five years just to get not enough to live on. It's simply not worth uploading for that. But there doesn't seem to be much point in pulling down what is already there and getting nothing for it when it's still paying for a few days' groceries.
-
Another factor is whether by uploading regularly it helps the visibility of all your files thus helping overall income....I think it does on some sites but I'm really not sure. Its all a bit of a gamble really ;-)
-
Some money is better than no money. :-(
Not if you're cannabalizing earnings with the same images elsewhere.
The trouble is, if you remove your image to prevent cannibalisation, there is very little chance that your picture elsewhere will pick up the sale you lost on iS. That sale will go to somebody else - probably on iS, but maybe elsewhere.
Even in the unusual case of your image being truly unique, the odds are probably still against it being found amidst a gazillion files on some other site, amid scores of different sites. And how many pictures are so unique as to not easily be substituted by something else?
It seems a lot of images are found by buyers using a google search, then they might stick with the site where they found what they wanted. Now I have zero images with istock, they're more likely to find them on the other sites :) I also think the only logical reason for sites to have no QC now is because they do better with google if they have more content, so that's another reason why I didn't leave any with istock. I'm not bothered about the small loss of earnings with istock, I'm sure sticking with them would of lost me more money in the long term.
-
I see things a bit differently, more in term how how much time is spent in uploading, given that the possible gains per upload are extremely low.
I do video and time lapses and for me still images are a by product: from my main activity I am left with around 200 photos every month totally for free.
For a couple of years I did not bother trying to upload them to agencies and left them sleep in my hard driver.
In the last three month I decided to give a try uploading photos to agencies. In order to be worthwhile I need to figure out how much time I spend on it every month and what the income is.
Since I am at the very beginning with it, I have set my target to $15 of income for photo for every hour I spend on it. It is a low amount, but in theory the hourly effort should generate a growing amount as the size of the portfolio increases.
I spend about 10 hours per month preparing and keywording the images, the rest of the time depends on the upload system for each agency.
SS, 123 RF and Alamy demand me no more than 1 hour each per month for uploading, so, as long as I make more than $20 with each of them I keep doing it (of course this amount must reach at least $50 each in one year).
FT takes me 5 hours per month, so, even if it is my second best earner, I am seriously thinking of dumping it for photos, as it take too much time.
The reason why I have never uploaded with istock (even if it could become my best earner in photos) is that I have the feeling that it is by far the most complicated of the lot. My head spins every time I read threads mentioning ESP, Deep Throath, Purple lagoon and other devilish stuff
-
All n' all iStock still is 20% of my income right after SS 33%...
Somehow they manage to do that while agencies with acceptable commission rate like Adobe/Fotolia comes after them and agencies with a fixed 50% commissions like GL do not even appear in my Excell graph...
It's time to accept the market we are in and make the most of it, or leave altogether and make a living in a more "fair" market... Good Lack!
-
It's time to accept the market we are in and make the most of it, or leave altogether and make a living in a more "fair" market...
Why?
Why should we have to leave altogether? As I said, I don't consider iStock to be worth uploading to any more but I don't feel inclined to leave when I'm still getting a little bit back for effort I made in the past.
-
It's time to accept the market we are in and make the most of it, or leave altogether and make a living in a more "fair" market...
Why?
Why should we have to leave altogether? As I said, I don't consider iStock to be worth uploading to any more but I don't feel inclined to leave when I'm still getting a little bit back for effort I made in the past.
I was referring to Microstock altogether and iStock is the pinnacle of the negative side of the conversation - somehow they represent everything wrong in the industry... Weather we like it or not they are one of the major players and also are part of the overall policy making. Having, even a few, commissions of 0.0something is sad and makes me furious but the overall picture is that their model works for both them and us.
I think worth uploading to iStock cause my spread sheet says so and so does for all their contributors. They are not going to change their approach unless the marketplace punish them for being out of balance. As long as they have happy customers, price/quality-wise and happy contributors return-wise they are going to keep on doing what they do, being major players & policy makers.
We either accept it and do the best with it or leave altogether...
What I'm trying to say is that I'm tired of all the nagging about iStock!
-
We either accept it and do the best with it or leave altogether...
What I'm trying to say is that I'm tired of all the nagging about iStock!
The nagging is part of the process of trying to understand what is happening (well, some of it is, anyway, another part tends to be mourning for the good times that there used to be). You either have to accept it or leave the forum altogether, I suppose. ;D
-
We either accept it and do the best with it or leave altogether...
What I'm trying to say is that I'm tired of all the nagging about iStock!
The nagging is part of the process of trying to understand what is happening (well, some of it is, anyway, another part tends to be mourning for the good times that there used to be). You either have to accept it or leave the forum altogether, I suppose. ;D
I tend to agree with your psychological approach to the subject... I too like to nag (vent) from time to time ;D
The fact that I'm not into the "iStock nag" bunch is cause I chipped in to Microstock when the deteriorating of iStock was very well underway and I haven't experienced the "Good old Times" ;)
-
I chipped in to Microstock when the deteriorating of iStock was very well underway and I haven't experienced the "Good old Times" ;)
Hard luck. They were very good indeed. I was making something like 20 or 30 times as much per image then as I do now. It really was worthwhile uploading. Woo Yay!
Then too many people climbed on board and the agencies started cutting what they paid out.
-
All n' all iStock still is 20% of my income right after SS 33%...
Somehow they manage to do that while agencies with acceptable commission rate like Adobe/Fotolia comes after them and agencies with a fixed 50% commissions like GL do not even appear in my Excell graph...
It's time to accept the market we are in and make the most of it, or leave altogether and make a living in a more "fair" market... Good Lack!
If we all accepted what istock have done, your earnings wouldn't be worth putting in Excell. Leaving istock was the right decision for me, I just wish I hadn't waited so long.
-
It's time to accept the market we are in and make the most of it, or leave altogether and make a living in a more "fair" market...
Why?
Why should we have to leave altogether? As I said, I don't consider iStock to be worth uploading to any more but I don't feel inclined to leave when I'm still getting a little bit back for effort I made in the past.
I was referring to Microstock altogether and iStock is the pinnacle of the negative side of the conversation - somehow they represent everything wrong in the industry... Weather we like it or not they are one of the major players and also are part of the overall policy making. Having, even a few, commissions of 0.0something is sad and makes me furious but the overall picture is that their model works for both them and us.
I think worth uploading to iStock cause my spread sheet says so and so does for all their contributors. They are not going to change their approach unless the marketplace punish them for being out of balance. As long as they have happy customers, price/quality-wise and happy contributors return-wise they are going to keep on doing what they do, being major players & policy makers.
We either accept it and do the best with it or leave altogether...
What I'm trying to say is that I'm tired of all the nagging about iStock!
are you a vector artist and thus getting 33% more return for every sale than indy photographers do?
-
are you a vector artist and thus getting 33% more return for every sale than indy photographers do?
Yes 95% of my portfolio are vectors... the rest, bitmap illustrations
-
That it is not the main problem.
Return from photos are extremely low.
You have to factor how much time you waste uploading: as an example SS takes me less than an hour per month to upload about 200 photos. I get about $100 with them, it is only just worth doing, and only it because it does go up every month.
Bloody istock is so complex that it takes me 5-6 hours per month to upload there, so if it doesn't give me at least $400, forget it
No lie. I do a LOT of editorial and have managed to figure out the required captions everywhere else, but ISTOCK always finds a reasosn to reject them. That and them taking the power of contributors to remove images from sale were the tipping point for me and why I quit trying there.
-
Some money is better than no money. :-(
Not if you're cannabalizing earnings with the same images elsewhere.
The trouble is, if you remove your image to prevent cannibalisation, there is very little chance that your picture elsewhere will pick up the sale you lost on iS. That sale will go to somebody else - probably on iS, but maybe elsewhere.
Even in the unusual case of your image being truly unique, the odds are probably still against it being found amidst a gazillion files on some other site, amid scores of different sites. And how many pictures are so unique as to not easily be substituted by something else?
You make a good point. But istock was not making money for me and I am happy to forgo the few sales that I did make there.
-
I agree with you all on Istock, but since january, my RPD is close to 0.6$. On SS is 0.55$. And RPI on Istock is close to 0.3$. Compared to SS which is about 0.2$. I do not know, feelings are mixed up, but numbers do not lie.
But how many DLs and how much does each make in total income? RPD is a false statistic is so many ways. My RPD is averaging $20 at Alamy, with one DL a month. Here's the sad part, that's more than I make now on IS since the change. And my iStock RPD is probably 20 cents. I haven't taken the time to do the math, because there are so many .02 subscription sales and the data they give us is almost impossible to evaluate.
Do you have the identical images on IS and SS for that RPI? I don't. For that reason, SS RPI is lower, many more images, but I'm earning more than ever on SS since the change and IS is down to 2007 income.
If I can ever manage my own images again on IS, I'm removing everything except the unsold leftovers. My hope is that some day, they may wake up and care about contributors and a fair commission rate. 2 cent subscription commission on a 10 cent download. Of course people are insulted and leaving.
Yes the fact that Getty has pulled this off and still has people happy to take nearly nothing and smile about what they get, is a masterful play, taking advantage of willing victims and desperate people. Above all, Getty is winning the race to the bottom by a large margin.
I agree with you that RPD is wrong in case of alamy, but in my case (Istock vs SS) here is the numbers:
Istock: about $400 - 670 DLs (RPD 0.6)
SS: about $190 - 470 DLs (RPD 0.4)
This is for month May. And for other months since January are pretty much the same math. I have same images on both sites, 50 illustrations less on istock compared to SS.
Because of that, I dont know what to think about Istock... In my case works fine, but...
Must agree, that's why RPD is only per person, not a general figure. Mine are much different from yours. More like RPD on IS is under 30c and on SS over $2 because of OD and EL. The obvious pint for someone reading these differences is, content. Whatever you are doing on IS is the right thing! :)
I don't mind the RPD on Alamy, it's just never going to equal the volume and dollars a month that I make on Micro.
-
Today earning from Istock (DeepMeta stats.) and shocking sales video :(
30 x 0.00514 = $ 0.1542
(https://img26.rajce.idnes.cz/d2602/14/14224/14224126_346bd058990f32a31a9dfe7a690ef040/images/vid.jpg?ver=0)
-
Today earning from Istock (DeepMeta stats.) and shocking sales video :(
30 x 0.00514 = $ 0.1542
(https://img26.rajce.idnes.cz/d2602/14/14224/14224126_346bd058990f32a31a9dfe7a690ef040/images/vid.jpg?ver=0)
Sadly, your only opt out is portfolio removal...
-
That's what we get paid for unlimited download for 19.99 per month at Promo or 26.99 per month at Animoto.
Istock Parners:
http://content.istockphoto.com/partners/ (http://content.istockphoto.com/partners/)
Promo pricing plans:
https://promo.com/pricing?utm_content=header (https://promo.com/pricing?utm_content=header)
Animoto pricing plans:
https://animoto.com/pricing (https://animoto.com/pricing)
-
my old files on istock (stopped uploading 4 years ago) were also finally removed because the per clips sales were crap. I waited if anything would improve, but it didn't. They should go fuck themselves.
-
Tested the waters with videos, uploaded a couple. One sold for 20 cents and the other 11 cents.
Couldn't believe it.
I don't think I'll be uploading any more!
-
Tested the waters with videos, uploaded a couple. One sold for 20 cents and the other 11 cents.
Couldn't believe it.
I don't think I'll be uploading any more!
They are just using video to retain photo customers so they give those crazy prices. Their footage library is much lower in quantity and quality compared to the alternatives stock footage sites. They have no other choice than to try to retain customers with rock bottom prices. You have to decide if this strategy is the best way for you as a supplier.
-
Today earning from Istock (DeepMeta stats.) and shocking sales video :(
30 x 0.00514 = $ 0.1542
(https://img26.rajce.idnes.cz/d2602/14/14224/14224126_346bd058990f32a31a9dfe7a690ef040/images/vid.jpg?ver=0)
Yeah well, just don't sell video on iStock and save yourself a lot of frustration.
-
The question is, would leaving increase sales on other websites? Or is iStock selling to these low prices to a client base that wouldn't buy video otherwise? Has anyone experienced this?
-
These prices send a signal to other agencies where the bottom is and if they want that market share they have to compete at their level, the only option for contributors is to withdraw their consent to sell at these prices.
-
i don't sell video at stock but i never check actually the statement...today i try to understand in detail...wwhile my earning in stock are 1&10 of ss...i don't understand why this difference considering the same images practically, but it's ok...my question is...i look at connect and had more than 5000 fixed usage fee for near 0,0038 cent...that make a whopping 20 dollar!!..i mean my images ar used for what how ..what means they are viewed...i mean at this point better give them free in unsplash at least those who buy know your work you and maybe you earn some customer...a
-
thats why i don't sell nothing in stock...my sales are given free :)...i checked last march and i had practically 400 fixed image line in connect...now more than 5000....what a mess of company of statement...
-
thats why i don't sell nothing in stock...my sales are given free :)...i checked last march and i had practically 400 fixed image line in connect...now more than 5000....what a mess of company of statement...
Here's what they say about Connect if this helps - not very transparent:
https://contributors.gettyimages.com/HelpArticle.aspx?article_id=5176
And if you use this link, and then click on 'download' under 'products' section, you can see the whole overview of how they license work.
https://contributors.gettyimages.com/article.aspx?article_id=6251
-
thats why i don't sell nothing in stock...my sales are given free :)...i checked last march and i had practically 400 fixed image line in connect...now more than 5000....what a mess of company of statement...
Here's what they say about Connect if this helps - not very transparent:
https://contributors.gettyimages.com/HelpArticle.aspx?article_id=5176
And if you use this link, and then click on 'download' under 'products' section, you can see the whole overview of how they license work.
https://contributors.gettyimages.com/article.aspx?article_id=6251
Here's something strange I just noticed on the Statements page in DeepMeta: I went from only 27 Connect items in February to 2257 Connect items in March. What might have caused that big of a jump? ? ?
-
I had over 4000 connect "items".
Maybe they just tally it up every few months?
Most of it seems to be for views on Pinterest.
But how are the videos being used??
-
thats why i don't sell nothing in stock...my sales are given free :)...i checked last march and i had practically 400 fixed image line in connect...now more than 5000....what a mess of company of statement...
Here's what they say about Connect if this helps - not very transparent:
https://contributors.gettyimages.com/HelpArticle.aspx?article_id=5176
And if you use this link, and then click on 'download' under 'products' section, you can see the whole overview of how they license work.
https://contributors.gettyimages.com/article.aspx?article_id=6251
Here's something strange I just noticed on the Statements page in DeepMeta: I went from only 27 Connect items in February to 2257 Connect items in March. What might have caused that big of a jump? ? ?
Apparently, some Connect customers only report once a year.
-
I had over 4000 connect "items".
Maybe they just tally it up every few months?
Most of it seems to be for views on Pinterest.
But how are the videos being used??
How were you able to determine that most of the views were on Pinterest?
-
Every one of mine has sales territory: California.
-
How were you able to determine that most of the views were on Pinterest?
That is what it says in many cases in deepmeta. Not all of them, but many.
-
I've just got a video sale for $ 0,65. Yeah!
-
And despite knowing, you get a few cents for video you keep uploading. Yeah!
-
I had over 3,000 connect sales this month and yet I had the lowest earnings this month from iStock going back as long as I can remember.
-
How were you able to determine that most of the views were on Pinterest?
That is what it says in many cases in deepmeta. Not all of them, but many.
interesting ... I'll have to pay more attention to my DeepMeta documents
-
Many of you know my history as I have been in this business for over 14 years. It is time to get smart! Oh I am so tired of hearing the dooms day it's no use.....blah blah blah Getty images makes deals with Canva, Animoto...... and the list goes on you would be amazed at how may places they are scrambling to sign up to their Premium Access! So like sheep to the slaughter you keep submitting your content to them and then complain?? I was Exclusive with Getty for 8 years, it was all great in the beginning but they kept making side deals with my content where I got paid nothing while they get an access fee from these companies every month and that fee is not small! Now you get your 0.025 cents and should be happy right? Nothing stays the same so I had to drop my exclusive status and scramble like mad to spread out my content to other sites and it worked well for me but trust me it was a ton of work. Now I have decided to go with Pond5 Exclusive and yes in a few years they could pull the same crazy stunt and I will have to scramble again, at least this time I have a better plan to speed things up! Markets change and time doesn't sit still but I am still living my dream and loving life. Now on video subs. keep in mind people don't post stock video clips on social media for fun! advertisers use stock but the general person will not, these companies are just using your content as a commodity to make themselves richer! It is our choice to allow that or not! I feel 60% is a very fair commission for my clips and will ride that train with joy as long as I can. Do what works for you I always say but stop the dooms day whaling and do something about it.
-
Ok, there are sales where you get very low amount of $ for sub. sales, but there are also sales, where you get high amount of $ for sub sale. So on average, RPD is similar to that at SS or FT, at least for me.
That's true. For me iS is my second earner. It's gross they pay so less but what can we do
Enviado desde mi ALP-L29 mediante Tapatalk
-
And despite knowing, you get a few cents for video you keep uploading. Yeah!
Actually I'm not a video maker, I've uploaded just some time lapse videos and sold them for about 10 to 12 $.
That was the first low sale for me. Just want to report it for this thread.
And yes, as I grow 20/30% every month, I'll keep upload.
Yeah! ;)
-
On one of my latest sales reports, I received $0.00 for one of my images. What's up with that? Is IStock giving away some of our content for free?
I have two sell earnings $0.00 per download.
-
On one of my latest sales reports, I received $0.00 for one of my images. What's up with that? Is IStock giving away some of our content for free?
I have two sell earnings $0.00 per download.
Were these from early on in ESP?
If so, these were tests, not actual sales.
If not, why not contact them to find out more?
-
That's why i stop uploading new stuff to them
-
That's why i stop uploading new stuff to them
Ditto.
-
On one of my latest sales reports, I received $0.00 for one of my images. What's up with that? Is IStock giving away some of our content for free?
I have two sell earnings $0.00 per download.
Were these from early on in ESP?
If so, these were tests, not actual sales.
If not, why not contact them to find out more?
Look at the attached image, this is awesome!
-
On one of my latest sales reports, I received $0.00 for one of my images. What's up with that? Is IStock giving away some of our content for free?
I have two sell earnings $0.00 per download.
Were these from early on in ESP?
If so, these were tests, not actual sales.
If not, why not contact them to find out more?
Look at the attached image, this is awesome!
Are they going to pay that or what
Enviado desde mi ALP-L29 mediante Tapatalk
-
On one of my latest sales reports, I received $0.00 for one of my images. What's up with that? Is IStock giving away some of our content for free?
I have two sell earnings $0.00 per download.
Were these from early on in ESP?
If so, these were tests, not actual sales.
If not, why not contact them to find out more?
Look at the attached image, this is awesome!
Are they going to pay that or what
Enviado desde mi ALP-L29 mediante Tapatalk
Look at the colum called Gross Royalty, i supose those are my earnings.
-
On one of my latest sales reports, I received $0.00 for one of my images. What's up with that? Is IStock giving away some of our content for free?
I have two sell earnings $0.00 per download.
Were these from early on in ESP?
If so, these were tests, not actual sales.
If not, why not contact them to find out more?
Look at the attached image, this is awesome!
Are they going to pay that or what
Enviado desde mi ALP-L29 mediante Tapatalk
Look at the colum called Gross Royalty, i supose those are my earnings.
But that's actually reported in the earning statement?
Enviado desde mi ALP-L29 mediante Tapatalk
-
On one of my latest sales reports, I received $0.00 for one of my images. What's up with that? Is IStock giving away some of our content for free?
I have two sell earnings $0.00 per download.
Were these from early on in ESP?
If so, these were tests, not actual sales.
If not, why not contact them to find out more?
Look at the attached image, this is awesome!
The $0 sales look like tests.
The mega-tiny sales are Connect, which is a sort of pay-per-view. In many cases we don't get paid, as they have to aggregate to 1c in a month, but I was astonished to see that a couple of months ago, I aggregated over $5 on one file (apparently).
-
On one of my latest sales reports, I received $0.00 for one of my images. What's up with that? Is IStock giving away some of our content for free?
I have two sell earnings $0.00 per download.
Were these from early on in ESP?
If so, these were tests, not actual sales.
If not, why not contact them to find out more?
Look at the attached image, this is awesome!
The $0 sales look like tests.
The mega-tiny sales are Connect, which is a sort of pay-per-view. In many cases we don't get paid, as they have to aggregate to 1c in a month, but I was astonished to see that a couple of months ago, I aggregated over $5 on one file (apparently).
So if you don't make the cent for a file in a month you lose that "money"?
Enviado desde mi ALP-L29 mediante Tapatalk
-
On one of my latest sales reports, I received $0.00 for one of my images. What's up with that? Is IStock giving away some of our content for free?
I have two sell earnings $0.00 per download.
Were these from early on in ESP?
If so, these were tests, not actual sales.
If not, why not contact them to find out more?
Look at the attached image, this is awesome!
The $0 sales look like tests.
The mega-tiny sales are Connect, which is a sort of pay-per-view. In many cases we don't get paid, as they have to aggregate to 1c in a month, but I was astonished to see that a couple of months ago, I aggregated over $5 on one file (apparently).
Thank you very much for clarifying.
-
New record 0.00001 dollar per download :(
(https://img26.rajce.idnes.cz/d2602/14/14224/14224126_346bd058990f32a31a9dfe7a690ef040/images/00001.jpg)
-
Seriously! People why do you continue to support this outfit?
Just delete your portfolios and stop the cycle of abuse!
-
Seriously! People why do you continue to support this outfit?
Just delete your portfolios and stop the cycle of abuse!
Because the $600+ earnings are better off in my pocket.
-
Seriously! People why do you continue to support this outfit?
Just delete your portfolios and stop the cycle of abuse!
Because the $600+ earnings are better off in my pocket.
If you would say $6000, then it wouldn't be so bad... but giving away all your hard worked images for $600? You really don't yet respect your work, do you?
-
Seriously! People why do you continue to support this outfit?
Just delete your portfolios and stop the cycle of abuse!
Because the $600+ earnings are better off in my pocket.
If you would say $6000, then it wouldn't be so bad... but giving away all your hard worked images for $600? You really don't yet respect your work, do you?
For the 1500 images I have there, that isn't bad. I wouldn't expect t $6k from them. I place images to libraries that fit the types of sales I get. RM for higher value etc.
-
After all, $.00001 is better than nothing at all! ::)
-
Seriously! People why do you continue to support this outfit?
Just delete your portfolios and stop the cycle of abuse!
Because the $600+ earnings are better off in my pocket.
$600 per month, per year or over the lifetime you've been with iS/Gty?
No disrespect to you but I was referring to all the other above complaining about low returns. Its not an issue with me if you or anyone else values their work so
poorly that they are willing to take a good shafting by these companies.
Its the attitude that no matter what they throw at a contributor its better than nothing.
Which is exactly why these agencies keep doing what they do.
-
i have to say that this month my red rain to 1,09 dollar...despite 15% and despite some file sold with connect at 1 cent.....i had two 300 dollar sale for example something i don't see in adobe that despite the higher royalty is at 0,75 and ss despite the good month still behind at 0,85.
-
After all, $.00001 is better than nothing at all! ::)
$0.000001 is better than nothing ;D
Or maybe $0.000000000000000000000000000001 ::)
-
Seriously! People why do you continue to support this outfit?
Just delete your portfolios and stop the cycle of abuse!
Because the $600+ earnings are better off in my pocket.
$600 per month, per year or over the lifetime you've been with iS/Gty?
No disrespect to you but I was referring to all the other above complaining about low returns. Its not an issue with me if you or anyone else values their work so
poorly that they are willing to take a good shafting by these companies.
Its the attitude that no matter what they throw at a contributor its better than nothing.
Which is exactly why these agencies keep doing what they do.
$600 per month. They've been steadily increasing for me over the last 18 months.
-
Seriously! People why do you continue to support this outfit?
Just delete your portfolios and stop the cycle of abuse!
Because the $600+ earnings are better off in my pocket.
$600 per month, per year or over the lifetime you've been with iS/Gty?
No disrespect to you but I was referring to all the other above complaining about low returns. Its not an issue with me if you or anyone else values their work so
poorly that they are willing to take a good shafting by these companies.
Its the attitude that no matter what they throw at a contributor its better than nothing.
Which is exactly why these agencies keep doing what they do.
$600 per month. They've been steadily increasing for me over the last 18 months.
Good for you :)
-
Seriously! People why do you continue to support this outfit?
Just delete your portfolios and stop the cycle of abuse!
Because the $600+ earnings are better off in my pocket.
$600 per month, per year or over the lifetime you've been with iS/Gty?
No disrespect to you but I was referring to all the other above complaining about low returns. Its not an issue with me if you or anyone else values their work so
poorly that they are willing to take a good shafting by these companies.
Its the attitude that no matter what they throw at a contributor its better than nothing.
Which is exactly why these agencies keep doing what they do.
$600 per month. They've been steadily increasing for me over the last 18 months.
Good for you :)
To be honest, I don't submit any footage to them as they do under value footage significantly compared to what I get at AS & SS. I would also like to submit more to them but, their god awful keywording system limits my patience to 1-2 submissions a year... hence they only have 8% of what I've submitted elsewhere.
And as for the $6k acceptable limit quoted above... well, good luck with that one. That would mean 95-98% of all contributors would have to pack in and delete their portfolios.
-
Seriously! People why do you continue to support this outfit?
Just delete your portfolios and stop the cycle of abuse!
Because the $600+ earnings are better off in my pocket.
If you would say $6000, then it wouldn't be so bad... but giving away all your hard worked images for $600? You really don't yet respect your work, do you?
That's $0.40 per image per month.
How much do you get for your 14,800+ video clips each month at Pond5?
From what I can see your ALL-TIME average is a little more than $2 per clip (maybe $2.50 or $3 if there were more than a few 4k sales). So he would reach that with images in 5-8 months...
-
If you would say $6000, then it wouldn't be so bad... but giving away all your hard worked images for $600? You really don't yet respect your work, do you?
Even with that amount of monthly income everyone should leave iStock... My video downloads are averaging little bellow 5$ at iStock. That is at least 1/5 of average HD sale elsewhere... They are stealling right in our face.
But in the eyes of a lot contributors, 6 grand is 6 grand. It is still hard to cut 72k per year from your sallary.
Everyone should says fuck it and pull the plug. And maybe in the future things would get better.
-
If you would say $6000, then it wouldn't be so bad... but giving away all your hard worked images for $600? You really don't yet respect your work, do you?
Even with that amount of monthly income everyone should leave iStock... My video downloads are averaging little bellow 5$ at iStock. That is at least 1/5 of average HD sale elsewhere... They are stealling right in our face.
But in the eyes of a lot contributors, 6 grand is 6 grand. It is still hard to cut 72k per year from your sallary.
Everyone should says fuck it and pull the plug. And maybe in the future things would get better.
As I mentioned above, I don't submit footage to iStock at all as I don't want to devalue my work elsewhere. I have a collection of images there that are good stock images that do well and I add to them once/twice a year. Only represent 8-10% of my work but they do return good income per image. But footage, no .... I seriously wouldn't do it.
-
How do you go about deleting files from istock...footage in particular. I am just so over the low commissions and would rather my work not be on the site.
-
How do you go about deleting files from istock...footage in particular. I am just so over the low commissions and would rather my work not be on the site.
You have to issue some tickets
Enviado desde mi ALP-L29 mediante Tapatalk